Share this:

Reports have been coming in that the next game from Id Software might just be using the little-known “first-person” format to deliver its particular brand of post-apocalyptic action. Well now we actually have proof! This most recent video (carefully embedded below by our technicians) proves, without any doubt, that Rage is a first-person shooter videogame. They said it couldn’t be done, and they’ve only gone and done it. For more evidence please refer to our recent hands-on preview article.
Turrets, spider-drones, and dudes crouched behind crates. It’s all here.

103 Comments

edit: oh wow! I did it! I got a first comment! I never understood those who wrote “first!” but now when it happened to me I cannot stop the euphoria! Its such a great feeling to write a useless comment as a first person. Is there an achievement for that?

Exactly bitbot, that’s why I use noclip on every single player game I have ever played. I mean, why should I have to sit through reload animations, cut scenes, gameplay, etc. I should be able to buy a game and see the ending immediately instead of waiting for some “animation” to finish (aka, the game).

I think it’s fair to say that gamepad makes the motion smoother which is visually more appealing. The snap-snap-snap of mouse motion is better for playing but certainly doesn’t show off the snazzy graphics.

Heh, about that Quxxy, lots of games are recorded on pc but played with pad, in an effort to lure console gamers with great graphics.

It’s the case of Brink. Lots of people are saying what is happening with the pc version of Brink, that it would be nice to have a video of the pc version. Surprise: most of the videos of Brink were already the pc version. The real console version have a few problems with slow texture-streaming and framerate so it doesn’t look that good.

Pre rendered shadows from terrain. Clunky animations from 2001.
I guess ID just gave up and not interested in graphics anymore.
(Don’t cry to me about how unimportant graphics are, in ID games graphics were the only thing worth mentioning)

I still fail to see much in these Rage/Borderlands comparisons beyond the setting and the aesthetics, at which point why aren’t you comparing this to Fallout 2?

Borderlands was basically Diablo FPS. The point of the game was to collect lots of loot, level up, equip new randomized weapons and items, grind out some more mobs, and ideally do it all with some friends. The actual FPS part of it, the gunplay and the enemies and level design, was all pretty poor. If you stripped out the loot and leveling and co-op there’d be no reason to play. Of course if you stripped those out of Diablo there’d also be no reason to play that game, either. Borderlands is fun in the way Diablo was fun.

Rage appears to be aiming to be a solid first-person shooter with nice, variegated weapons and good gunplay. Fun in the way that Quake was fun, or Half-Life, or Serious Sam, or pick-a-non-RPG-FPS. Will it be as good as those games? Probably not. Will it be a better straight-up FPS than Borderlands? Almost certainly.

It is all very telling. AND, doesn’t anybody think it oddly telling that a lot of people appear to be wearing tighter jeans now than they were a few years ago? It’s almost as if there’s some sort of … oh, I don’t know … a trend? What I want to know, is who should I accuse of copying who? It’s very important.

P.S. It actually looks more like a “techno-Deadwood” to me, whereas Borderlands is more of a “Fallout3-meets-anythingdesignedbyEpic”. But that’s just me and my eyes.

Looks like the kind of game I would like to play, where I traipse around with a gun attached to my face, making other people’s faces explode with my facial attachment. A first-person shooter, as you say.

That moment right there – along with most of the video really – damn near caused me physical pain. Rarely has pad controlled manshooting looked worse. So instead of being left thinking “That looks particularly… Okay. Run-of-the-mill, even.” I’m left baffled and aghast at the whole atrocious pad aiming business. This might be either good or bad for id.

Maybe it’s because simulating mouselook with a pad just isn’t a very good way to do first person shootiness? I certainly have that experience with all of the newer console manshoots I’ve played. Whereas I seem to remember Goldeneye and Timesplitters being actually rather bearable to play. Quite like the Dooms and Hexens and such were just fine with keyboard controls.

wow it looks slooooooooooooooow. I hope he’s walking there, if thats the running movement speed i wont be bothering with this game. Theres plenty of snail paced FPS games with very limited movement out there already, why would we need another.

Looks really boring – just stand and deliver. Why can’t they make the A.I more aggressive so the player can’t just pop in and out behind cover and fire off pot shots? It’s like the A.I doesn’t realize that it has a numerical advantage.

I read an interview with some bloke at id (either Carmack or Hollenshead I think) a few years back where they hailed a future of asset sharing between games and studios so that it was nolonger necessary for every studio to pay a modeler and artist to create a brand new Fire Extinguisher for every single game.

So in answer to your wonderment, I imagine the fire extinguishers will be straight from Doom 3.

The TPV is even more awful for the car part. TPV makes sense for racing game to emphasize the chases but for traveling and aiming it really is a poor design choice. Less immersion, less speeding, less weapon feeling and unpleasante aiming.

I’ve been really impressed with the technology that id is bringing to bear, but the game itself just looks linear and unoriginal. Maybe it gets better once you are immersed in the game, so I’ll save my final judgement for when the game comes out. I sincerely hope that id redeems themselves with Rage in the end.

I think that a linear game might be better than another sandbox like Far Cry 2 or Red Faction:Guerilla, where you have to drive through endless deserts between repetitive missions. Sometimes games need to be a bit more story-driven and linear to avoid becoming boring, but at the same time not sliding into an overly scripted corridor of Call of Duty 4-5-6-whatever.

I actually did really enjoy both of those games. I’m just a bit afraid that Rage is going to go the way of Crysis 2 and be bogged down by the success of Call of Duty (though I was pretty happy with the changes Crytek made to the multiplayer side of the game). I’m really interested to see if id decides to include something in the way of RPG elements to break up the shooting/driving that leaves a real impact on the gameplay

I don’t think you really understand the meaning of non-linearity in this medium (which is forgivable as it’s become quite the buzzword when it doesn’t even apply in most cases), as plonking the player in a fairly large world like in Farcry and RF:G doesn’t equate to the game being non linear. As after all there are still the same quests to do (perhaps you don’t have to do all of them, but it doesn’t matter) there is still the same over arching story that the develops created and the whole game basically trys to give you experiences that the designers want you to experience.

Giving the player a world like in the games I mentioned is basically just room for them to dick about a bit in in-between missions, but even that feels awfully static. If you want a better idea of what a truly non linear game is then just look at Dwarf Fortress and Minecraft, which are games that, rather than funnel the player, they create a fairly loose structure to the gameplay that can be exploited as the player wishes. I think emergent gameplay (basically doing things the designer didn’t forsee, which is rather rare in these linear games you speak of) makes for a much more personal, gratifying and entertaining experience.

After all this negative stuff about every game out I’ve decided to be negative about every game out now and in the future and I mean every single game, I’ll probably be noticed more and that’ll make me down with kids I’m sure.

I heard Quake sounds in that! The breathing sounds from the gas mask guys where almost exactly like the enforcers in Quake 1 and the atmospheric sounds in the second room sounded like they were lifted directly from Quake.
I count that as a plus – immediately made it to my must-buy-list just for that!

Visually nice. But from that short clip the gun-play looked a little like Goldeneye. Not necessarily bad, but I was kind of expecting some more innovation in the game-play department. Perhaps this has yet to be revealed and the game will blow our minds.

I’m not so impressed. The initial animation looks like “strike pose, then pose, then pose” rather than a fluid animation. Although I liked the little touches of guys falling over not-quite-dead, or trying to limp away.

Maybe I’m getting older, but this looks pretty boring. Gameplay is a mish mash of what we’ve already seen a thousand times before. No one’s cared about technology since 2002 and BF3 looks a trillion times better.

To my mind, ID have been going down hill since Quake 2. Nothing they’ve released since has occupied more than a few hours play and certainly no replay – though Doom, Quake and Quake 2 have all stolen years.

Rage doesn’t seem to offer anything to redress this trend, at least from what I’ve seen and read of it thus far.

Here’s hoping it turns out to be something more than another 5 hour FPS rehash though. As it stands, it’s a steam sale jobbie for me atm.

I think I’ll really enjoy Rage, it looks like an extremely solid shooter, and that’s what I’ll expect from it. When I’m not nibbling on delicate indie hors d’oeuvres or getting drunk on mad Eastern European concoctions, I like to munch on some FPS comfort food.

Unlike the DNF footage, the shootin’ in this looks great and the game could go far on that and the visuals alone but chuck in the solid looking driving and fun deployables (love the path finding on that spider bot), and you’ve got what looks like a really fun time. It ain’t going to be innovative, or some sprawling open-world epic but it doesn’t look like it’s going to be as constricted as CoD et al either.

I did love the way that the bad kicked the sentry over and, as Angel Dust said, the path finding of the spider-bot seems cool. Also: /those/ missions from Vice City which was stolen (homaged) from The Dead Pool, could be fun. But (now I might be showing my age here, but…) iron sights? Why, id, why? They are a gimmick that just won’t go away! Don’t get me wrong, they are perfectly ok in context, and can be quite benficial to such a game. But Rage, from that clip, seemed to be a corridor shooter (for the most part) so there would be no need to have to switch between the hip and the horrible distraction that is iron sights. It just seems to be there for those that only feel comfortable looking down the right side of the barrel of a gun. The only way that they, as a viable element of the game, is by making shooting from the hip grossly inacurate and thereby making playing the game in that manner unplayable. But apart from a bit of wandering (God bless you, Quake 2), there seemed to be no advantage. Other than following suit in this unnecessary, though relevent in the correct context, fad.

Fad? Lordy I hope not. Personally I have a hard time getting immersed in an FPS if I can’t look down the sights (tried replaying HL2 recently, it killed it for me). It’s the natural way to fire a gun when you’re going for accuracy over suppression. Without iron sights, I almost feel like the game is decided for me. While I have to put the cursor on the target, my shot pattern is still randomly decided by the game, rather than my skill in aiming and managing recoil. Particularly bad in FPS RPGs where you have an accuracy stat to level up as well (see Fallout 3).

A matter of opinion at the end of the day, surely, but I am truly surprised to see someone argue against iron sights.

Had no problem with iron sights in Stalker, but i recently tried to play Brothers in Arms (horrible game btw) and they were ridiculous.
See enemy. Click right moust button. Click left button. Click right button. Move to next enemy. How annoying. What was wrong with See enemy. Click left button?

I don’t want to be usual negative internet man, but i got bored of watching that trailer about a 3rd of the way through and started clicking onwards to see if anything interesting happened.

Then again, playing FPS games is always a lot more fun than watching them, dodging from crate to crate doesn’t make a very exciting movie. I still have hopes for this, as i like the setting and idea – but i was hoping the gunplay would be a little more “action”.

(but i guess stalker was mostly iron-sights from behind crates too, and i enjoyed that.)

doesn’t look so bad but I’m getting sick and tired of these shooters where the character is a slow ass motherfucker. Are we ever going to play as a superhuman superhero again? Funnier than hiding behind a box and taking shots at stationary enemies